In 1998, Bangladesh suffered from some of the worst flooding they had ever seen. Over two-thirds of the land was covered by water. Thirty-million people lost their belongings along with their homes. Due to many factors of the 1998 floods 1,070 people lost their lives. The flooding also damaged crops with a total of 668,529 crops destroyed(“Floods In Bangladesh”). Hejera, an average Bangladeshi lives everyday knowing her home could soon be destroyed (Stackhouse, John.). Could you imagine living like that?
The flood conditions are very harmful to the people of Bangladesh and action needs to be taken now, because Bangladesh is not capable of fixing these problems on their own. We have devised a plan to conquer these problems. Our plan has three main ideas that we want to accomplish. These ideas are 1. We get the support and help of Annex 1 nations. Annex 1 nations are nations, such as the United States, that could give money to help causes, in this case the cause is to aid the Bangladesh government. 2. We want to build strong, good, and lasting flood control systems. 3. Lastly we want no “fooling around.” We want this plan to get done as fast and as soon as possible.
Our first point is that we must get the support and help of Annex 1 countries. Annex 1 countries are the more powerful and adapted countries in the world. Bangladesh ,however, is an Annex 3 country. Its government does not have much power over the locals, and they are a rather poor country. As mentioned in step 3 of our plan, there is an account set aside designed for funding developing countries and giving aid called the Millennium Challenge Accounts ("Millennium Challenge Account..."). This would be a better place for the funds to go than most because over the course of time it has landed in the hands of corrupt dictators(Powell, Benjamin...). To make sure it does not land in the wrong hands we could make the funds only accessible for the help of the Bangladesh flood plans. Also we could have a government official follow the money the whole way, from the account to the hands of Bangladesh's government.
Although we see the great danger of these flooding situations, most of the locals in Bangladesh do not. Most of them believe the flooding actually enriches their crops and do not want Western help (Stamets, Reena S.). Since Bangladesh's government is democratic, President Zillur Rahman cannot implement these policies without the people of Bangladesh's support (CIA-The World...). So, we also need the help of Annex 1 countries to convince local Bangladeshis that something needs to be done to fix their flooding problems or global warming will finish them (Stamets, Reena S.). One thing we can do is set up an education and research program to educate the president and Bangladeshis about the seriousness of flooding. Once we educate the president Zillur Rahman it might be able to get the support of the natives. The people of Bangladesh would most likely listen to one of their own, than one of us Americans. It is important to note that these nations would not just be persuading by mouth, but also by the use of international service projects and money.
Our second point is that we want to build strong, good, and lasting flood control systems. There are roughly 10,000 square kilometers of water in Bangladesh (Geography of Bangladesh.). The cost of a levee is roughly $1,700 per linear foot. This means that if we wanted to build only levees it would cost roughly at most $50 billion dollars to stop the flooding (Scandaliato, Sam S.). If the Bangladeshis did not want to just build levees there are other options. They could also build dams, embankments, flood walls, storage areas, wash lands, and many more structures to aid flood prevention.
Our third and final point is that we want no "fooling around" and we want this plan to start as soon as possible. The advantages of our plan over all others are obvious, therefore I see no reason as to why this plan should not be put into action immediately, so as to not waste the time and lives of Bangladeshis.
We plan to get the support of Annex 1 countries and have them aid in paying for the development of our flood prevention structures by using the Millennium Challenge Accounts. We, the United States, care for human life and the lives of the people of Bangladesh. Our plan is the best for the safety and health of the venerable country of Bangladesh.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html>.
Stackhouse, John. "Pain and Joy in Bangladesh: A Tale of Two Sisters." International Wildlife July-Aug. 1994. The H.W. Wilson Company/WilsonWeb. Wilson Web, July-Aug. 1994. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://vnweb.hwwilson.com/hww/results/results_single_ftPES.jhtml>.
The affirmative would have you believe that their plan is better, but there are many problems that will come from their plan. Debt, potential warfare, and failure of workers are all problems with the affirmative team’s plan.
Now I would like to introduce our plan.
Step 1: The government prepares for flood relief.
Step 2: The government sets away money so it is not used it away so it is not used.
Step 3: Bangladesh works to convince the peasants that some work needs to be done.
Step 4: Bangladeshi government convinces the people that they need to do the work (“China Relations with...”).
Step 5: The money that was set away is used to build flood controlling structures (Flood Control-Wikipedia.). This is done while using as little machine power as possible.
Step 6: The flood damage is reduced over a period of years and Bangladesh is free to grow (CIA-The World...).
The first point is that of national debt. Many Annex I countries are over $50 billion in debt, and the United States has $12.8 trillion.
As you can see, these countries can clearly not afford to fund such a project, and if they tried to fund it, it would force them into even more debt, which would weaken their economy, so helping Bangladesh would hurt the country itself. Also, many eastern countries surrounding Bangladesh, and including Bangladesh do not always want help from foreigners. There are cases in which the Myanmar government declined help. Also when offered a donation of £60 million, Bangladesh declined this offer (Vidal, John).
Also, outsiders help is not always successful or helpful. In Rwanda in 1994, UN workers stood by while thousands were slaughtered. In Bosnia, the UN tried to give Muslims a safe area, but did nothing to secure or protect them. Another slip-up the United Nations has had is the food smuggled from their World Food Program in Somalia, which was then sold on the black market. In Cote d’Ivoire, charges of sexual exploitation came about, and shockingly, the perpetrators were UN workers.
My third point is potential warfare, as stated before, Myanmar is communist, and its dictator is ranked one of the top five worst dictators in the world. (Powell, Benjamin…). In fact at the United Nations on Tuesday, September 25, 2007, Bush accused Myanmar of imposing “a 19-year reign of fear” that denies basic freedoms of speech, assembly and worship ("Nations React to…). This closeness of these two nations makes it inevitable that at least one foreign relief agent would get into Myanmar. Considering the bad history of UN workers’ assistance to foreign countries, it makes it even more likely that one of them could become drunk and do this kind of act (Lynch, Colum.). This would definitely incite Myanmar’s anger. Since Myanmar is a military regimen it is likely they would use this as an excuse to start a war (CIA-World Factbook…). This would probably be done on Bangladeshis’ own soil, killing the people that we should be saving.
My final point is that the affirmative side is contradicting it’s own interests. They say that they want to build these levees and dams to control the flooding, but this is going to require the use of machinery and other CO2. By emitting more CO2 they are just speeding up the process of global warming, which would cause the oceans to rise, and would further intensify the flooding in Bangladesh. Therefore there plan is contradicting to itself.
It is clear to see from the aforementioned examples that the affirmative side’s argument is not only harmful to Bangladesh, but also harmful to the environment as well. It risks throwing many Annex I countries into even more debt than they already have. It could also lead to doing the exact opposite of saving them, and could end up wiping them out. Our plan might sound too complicated or difficult for the Bangladeshi people to do on their own, but once they accomplish all of the tasks necessary to help cope with the changing climate, and constant flooding, they will develop a great sense of national pride, because they did everything by themselves, from raising the money, to building the flood control structures.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html>.
As I listened to you give your speech on what your plans are for the country of Bangladesh, I did not notice too much of a difference. You built on to some of our points to make improvements, but the basic ideas of both our plans seem to be extremely similar. So, what exactly are the negative areas of our plan? I do not believe there are any. And your failed attempt to argue that our plan is not the best idea shows how concrete our plan actually is. Our plan involves gaining the help and support of Annex 1 countries to fund and convince the government and locals that action needs to take place, but the actual work will be done by the people of Bangladesh themselves. Our idea of how to fix the flood problems is by creating structures to prevent flooding, but unlike previous plans that have been put into action; we plan on doing environmental research before hand to decide which structures are in Bangladesh’s best interest. The cost of the flood control methods may seem like a high price to pay, but too much money is already spent each year on repairing flood damage. These three points are the main reasons why our plan has no flaws what so ever.
First of all, our plan involves gaining the help and support of Annex 1 countries, but that does not mean that Annex 1 countries will do all of the work. On page three of our plan it says that the natives will be building and doing most of the work for the flood preventions. Since we would allow them to do this themselves, they would begin to feel like they could do something instead of having to wait for Westerners to do things for them ("China-Relations with..."). Also if we let them become too dependent on foreign money and foreign labor, then they might not be able to accomplish other things on their own because they think they cannot ("China-Relations with..."). This is just one reason why our plan is in everyone’s best interest.
Another "flaw" you might have found in our plan is that there have been levees and other structures built before to try and prevent the flooding problems that Bangladesh experiences, but these plans have been unsuccessful. In fact, these structures have actually caused more harm than help to the flooding issues. There is a huge difference between previous plans and our plan and that difference is research. We plan on sending professional environmentalists over to Bangladesh to map out and plan the best and most effective places to build these structures and exactly what structures to build in what specific areas. Our plan involves lots of preparation before we actually take action. Though our plan said a major goal is to get this done quickly, that does not mean without special planning. We will carefully prepare the best and most effective methods on how to prevent flooding according to the experts in that specific field. So as you can see, this is not a "flaw" at all.
Fifty billion dollars may seem a bit pricey but you must keep in mind that this fifty billion dollars is based on the idea that we would just build levees and levees are the most expensive flood control structure. However, levees are not the only flood prevention method we plan on using. Other structures such as floodways, retention ponds, terrace hills and embankments can also be used in areas that the experts believe is most appropriate and these structures are less expensive. Money from the government's FAPs or Flood Action Plans can be given to this cause as not to disrupt the economy and taxes being paid by Bangladeshis (Islam, Nazrul.). This should provide adequate funding as, "It is now several decades that Bangladesh has been regularly spending about 20% of its budget on water development projects" (Islam, Nazrul). I don't believe money or debt in the United States will be an issue because of the money received from different resources such as the Flood Action Plans and the Millennium Challenge Accounts, and also the money that Bangladesh can and will contribute once they understand this plan is in their best interest. I think it is more intelligent to spend the money on preventing the floods than to spend it on repairing the country after it has been damaged, especially because of the number of deaths and homeless people due to the terrible flooding.
Our plan is best way to end the flood and global warming issues in the country of Bangladesh. Even though this plan involves aid from Annex 1 countries, the natives do most of the work. Also, structures built in the past have been unsuccessful, but our plan involves much more research and preparation than any other plans have involved before. The amount of money needed to put this plan into action may seem like a vast amount but when you look at the big picture, you realize that the money already put into fixing the flood damage is much more than the amount spent to prevent the floods from occurring. As you read our carefully devised plan and listen to our main points in this debate, it is clear that Improving Bangladesh: A Multi-Step Plan to Cope With Global Warming is better than any other plan that has been devised before us.
Martin, Gary. "Pull Yourself up by Your Bootstraps." The Meanings and Origins of Sayings and Phrases | List of Sayings | English Sayings | Idiom Definitions | Idiom Examples | Idiom Origins | List of Idioms | Idiom Dictionary | Meaning of Idioms. The Phrase Finder, 2010. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/290800.html>.
"Pride | Define Pride at Dictionary.com." Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pride?o=100074>.
Rosenberg, Joel C. Inside the Revolution. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House, 2009. Print.
Stackhouse, John. "Pain and Joy in Bangladesh: A Tale of Two Sisters." International Wildlife July-Aug. 1994. The H.W. Wilson Company/WilsonWeb. Wilson Web, July-Aug. 1994. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://vnweb.hwwilson.com/hww/results/results_single_ftPES.jhtml>.
Negative Rebuttal Speech
By: Seth Musser
The affirmative team may tell you their plan is the best, but if we implement it things could get a lot worse. Their plan will cause Annex I countries to go more in debt than they are, making their currency weaker, and paving the way for lots of problems in their own country (Ferraro, Vincent...). Their plan would use international aid to complete the project. Since Myanmar is right next to Bangladesh this could start a war (Powell, Benjamin.). Our plan also will not hasten climate change through the use of gas powered vehicles (Rohrer, Juerg.).
I will show that we have the better plan, that will actually help more in the long run than the affirmative team’s plan. Their plan will work for a little while, but the repercussions of it could be horrible. Our plan has several advantages over theirs, all of which I would briefly like to point out. Our plan will not put Annex I nations more heavily in debt than they already are (Ferraro, Vincent...). It will not start a potential war (Powell, Benjamin.). Finally, our plan isn’t counterintuitive, as theirs is (Counterintuitive, Definition of...).
It is important to note that the main difference in our plan from theirs is that we have Bangladeshis doing the labor, raising the money, and building their country. They will be able to feel empowered and self-reliant because of this (China-Relations with...). They will be able to gain national pride or the, “Pleasure or satisfaction taken in something done by ... oneself ....” (Pride, Define Pride...). All of our main points show how this will create a better country for them and a better world for everyone else.
Our first point is that of international debt. Annex I nations are nations that are industrialized. (UNFCC.). These nations are heavily in debt (Ferraro, Vincent.), and this project would require roughly $50 billion to complete the way the affirmative team wants to (Strong Levees.). This increasing debt will weaken these nations currency and give their debtors power over them.
This could create a serious problem, as these nations will be more easily pushed into bad economic situations. Since these Annex I nations are some of the “superpowers”, if they fall because of a bad economy, chaos would ensue. There would be a scrambling of other nations for this status (“Superpower...”). These other nations are by and large communist, or corrupt, so this would be another problem presented by the collapse of Annex I countries (“Third World: Definition.”). I am not saying that this specific project will be the “the straw that breaks the camel’s back,” but I am saying it certainly is a very large straw, if not a lead brick.
Our second point is that of potential warfare. Geographically, Bangladesh is right next to Myanmar, a nation which is decidedly communist, decidedly Anti-Western, or Anti-Annex I, and against human rights. In fact Than Shwe, the military dictator of Myanmar is ranked as one of the top five worst dictators in the world (Powell, Benjamin.). Were Annex I nations to enter Bangladesh this kind of dictatorship would most definitely be opposed, especially considering that Myanmar resisted Western aid after the cyclone that hit in 2008 (“Cyclone Relief Efforts...”).
This closeness of these two nations makes it inevitable that at least one foreign relief agent would get into Myanmar. Considering the bad history of UN workers’ assistance to foreign countries, it makes it even more likely that one of them could become drunk and do this kind of act (Lynch, Colum.). This would definitely incite Myanmar’s anger. Since Myanmar is a military regimen it is likely they would use this as an excuse to start a war (CIA-World Factbook.). This would probably be done on Bangladeshis‘ own soil, killing the people that we should be saving.
Our final point against the affirmative is the fact that their plan is counterintuitive (“Counterintuitive-Definition of...”). They say that to adequately protect the people of Bangladesh they need to build expensive structures like levees. These expensive structures would need gas powered vehicles to build, emitting CO2 and hastening global warming (Rohrer, Juerg.). This would simply melt the polar ice caps more, and cause even higher levels of water than now. This is admittedly already happening because of other nation’s pollution, but such a large project would only hasten this (DiMento, Joseph F.).
The affirmative team, as I said earlier is also coming from the viewpoint that the only thing to do is something expensive that uses technology that emits CO2 (Strong Levees). However, this is not true as there are many different ways for the Bangladeshis to do flood control. They would be able to construct floodways, retention ponds, and terrace hills by hand, so as not to defeat their own purpose and kill more Bangladeshis (“Flood Control-Wikipedia...”).
As you can see from our explanation the affirmative side’s plan will be very detrimental. Not only could it destroy finances of Annex I countries, potentially creating chaos, it also might start a war killing the people they should be saving, and finally it will make the problem worse, in the long run, not better. However, our plan allows Bangladeshis to raise the money, do the labor, and do it without creating major climate change. It is obvious logically and emotionally which is the plan to go with to save Bangladeshis, ours.
"Counterintuitive - Definition of Counterintuitive by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia." Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.thefreedictionary.com/counterintuitive__>.
DiMento, Joseph F., and Pamela Doughman. Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2007. Print.
Ferraro, Vincent, and Rosser, Melissa. "Global Debt and Third World Development." Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts. 1994. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/globdebt.htm__>.
"Flood Control - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia Foundation, 8 Apr. 2010. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_control__>.
Lynch, Colum. "U.N. Says Its Workers Abuse Women in Congo (washingtonpost.com)." Washingtonpost.com - Nation, World, Technology and Washington Area News and Headlines. Washington Post, 27 Nov. 2004. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15363-2004Nov26.html__>.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html__>.
Rohrer, Juerg. "CO2 - the Major Cause of Global Warming | Time for Change." Time for Change | For Whom Enough Is Too Little - Nothing Is Ever Enough. July 2007. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://timeforchange.org/CO2-cause-of-global-warming__>.
The negative side does have good points but nothing that we have not brought into consideration. The negative side has devised a plan but their plan is very similar to our plan. They say our plan is not good enough but they use a lot of points and ideas originated from our plan. So we, as the affirmative side, stand here confused. Are you against or for our plan?
As it has been brought to attention, Bangladesh is dealing with very serious flooding issues. In my opinion and the opinion of my teammate, we feel that our plan is the best and most effective way to help the country of Bangladesh. Improving Bangladesh: A Multi-Step Plan to Cope With Global Warming goes into great detail of our plan but the three main points we wanted to bring to your attention today is, Number One: Our plan wants to get aid from Annex 1 countries. We need help from Annex 1 countries because Bangladesh is not capable of handling its problems on its own. We do not intend on the United States funding everything and the Bangladesh government doing nothing, but we know that they are going to need some help. Number Two: We want to build good, strong, long lasting flood control systems to prevent future flooding in the country of Bangladesh. Number Three: We want this done fast as to not waste the lives of the people of Bangladesh. These are the three main points of our highly detailed carefully devised plan. I strongly and truly believe that our plan is in everyone’s best interest.
Negative Summary Speech
By. Adam Tobias The affirmative side might tell you that their plan is the best, but when you think it through, both on the logical and emotional side, our plan is much better for the Bangladeshis. We are having them build a sense of national pride, our plan is approximately $49 billion cheaper than their plan, and we are helping them avoid conflicts with other nations.
As stated before, there are many problems that would be encountered if countries were to help Bangladesh with the affirmative plan. They are the extreme debt than many Annex I countries face, the possibility that the outside help will fail the mission, the potential problems that Bangladesh could experience from its neighbors because of the help they received.
As you have heard earlier, there are many reasons why the affirmative plan is not in the Bangladeshis best interests. Our plan will allow the Bangladeshis to do the project all by themselves, in a quick and efficient way. They will be gathering all of the money required for the project, then once they have the regular people convinced that it has to be done, the money that was gathered is now used to build the flood controlling structures. This will lead to a sense of national pride, and now the Bangladeshis will not experience such harsh losses when floods occur.
Affirmative Final Focus
By.Kristi Fidler
`
The final focuses that I want you to remember is that the negative side’s plan seems to be extremely similar to ours. We clearly stated and built on to the idea of building flood control structures and doing research before hand to make sure that our plan is successful. The Bangladeshis will do the actual work and we will try to use the most environmentally friendly structures as possible. The cost of these structures can be easily covered by the Bangladeshis themselves and the many accounts set up to fix problems such as this, so the US’s contributions money wise will be minimal to none. I think that the negative sides have some good key points but their minor flaws can be easily fixed to make our plan the best plan that has ever been devised.
Negative Final Focus
By: Seth Musser
My final focus was all impromptu and therefore I do not have typed materials to submit here.
Table of Contents
The Affirmative's Opening Speech
By. Ashtin NellIn 1998, Bangladesh suffered from some of the worst flooding they had ever seen. Over two-thirds of the land was covered by water. Thirty-million people lost their belongings along with their homes. Due to many factors of the 1998 floods 1,070 people lost their lives. The flooding also damaged crops with a total of 668,529 crops destroyed(“Floods In Bangladesh”). Hejera, an average Bangladeshi lives everyday knowing her home could soon be destroyed (Stackhouse, John.). Could you imagine living like that?
The flood conditions are very harmful to the people of Bangladesh and action needs to be taken now, because Bangladesh is not capable of fixing these problems on their own. We have devised a plan to conquer these problems. Our plan has three main ideas that we want to accomplish. These ideas are 1. We get the support and help of Annex 1 nations. Annex 1 nations are nations, such as the United States, that could give money to help causes, in this case the cause is to aid the Bangladesh government. 2. We want to build strong, good, and lasting flood control systems. 3. Lastly we want no “fooling around.” We want this plan to get done as fast and as soon as possible.
Our first point is that we must get the support and help of Annex 1 countries. Annex 1 countries are the more powerful and adapted countries in the world. Bangladesh ,however, is an Annex 3 country. Its government does not have much power over the locals, and they are a rather poor country. As mentioned in step 3 of our plan, there is an account set aside designed for funding developing countries and giving aid called the Millennium Challenge Accounts ("Millennium Challenge Account..."). This would be a better place for the funds to go than most because over the course of time it has landed in the hands of corrupt dictators(Powell, Benjamin...). To make sure it does not land in the wrong hands we could make the funds only accessible for the help of the Bangladesh flood plans. Also we could have a government official follow the money the whole way, from the account to the hands of Bangladesh's government.
Although we see the great danger of these flooding situations, most of the locals in Bangladesh do not. Most of them believe the flooding actually enriches their crops and do not want Western help (Stamets, Reena S.). Since Bangladesh's government is democratic, President Zillur Rahman cannot implement these policies without the people of Bangladesh's support (CIA-The World...). So, we also need the help of Annex 1 countries to convince local Bangladeshis that something needs to be done to fix their flooding problems or global warming will finish them (Stamets, Reena S.). One thing we can do is set up an education and research program to educate the president and Bangladeshis about the seriousness of flooding. Once we educate the president Zillur Rahman it might be able to get the support of the natives. The people of Bangladesh would most likely listen to one of their own, than one of us Americans. It is important to note that these nations would not just be persuading by mouth, but also by the use of international service projects and money.
Our second point is that we want to build strong, good, and lasting flood control systems. There are roughly 10,000 square kilometers of water in Bangladesh (Geography of Bangladesh.). The cost of a levee is roughly $1,700 per linear foot. This means that if we wanted to build only levees it would cost roughly at most $50 billion dollars to stop the flooding (Scandaliato, Sam S.). If the Bangladeshis did not want to just build levees there are other options. They could also build dams, embankments, flood walls, storage areas, wash lands, and many more structures to aid flood prevention.
Our third and final point is that we want no "fooling around" and we want this plan to start as soon as possible. The advantages of our plan over all others are obvious, therefore I see no reason as to why this plan should not be put into action immediately, so as to not waste the time and lives of Bangladeshis.
We plan to get the support of Annex 1 countries and have them aid in paying for the development of our flood prevention structures by using the Millennium Challenge Accounts. We, the United States, care for human life and the lives of the people of Bangladesh. Our plan is the best for the safety and health of the venerable country of Bangladesh.
Works Cited
"CIA - The World Factbook." Welcome to the CIA Web Site ? Central Intelligence Agency. 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 13 Apr. 2010. <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html>.
"Floods in Bangladesh - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 14 Apr. 2010. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floods_in_Bangladesh>.
"Geography of Bangladesh - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia Foundation. Web. 16 Apr. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Bangladesh#Physical_geography>.
Hossain, Akhtar. "Bangladesh: Flood Management." WMO/GWP Associated Programme on Flood Management. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <http://www.apfm.info/pdf/case_studies/bangladesh.pdf>.
"List of Annex I Countries." Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://www.oecd.org/document/13/0,3343,en_2649_34361_1849485_1_1_1_1,00.html>
"Millennium Challenge Account - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia Foundation, 4 Mar. 2010. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_Account>.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html>.
Scandaliato, Sam S. Strong Levees. Strong Levees, 2009. Web. 16 Apr. 2010. <http://www.stronglevees.com/>.
Stackhouse, John. "Pain and Joy in Bangladesh: A Tale of Two Sisters." International Wildlife July-Aug. 1994. The H.W. Wilson Company/WilsonWeb. Wilson Web, July-Aug. 1994. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://vnweb.hwwilson.com/hww/results/results_single_ftPES.jhtml>.
Stamets, Reena S. "World Bank Plan to Stop Floods Horrifies Bangladeshis." Worldandnation: World Bank Plan to Stop Floods Horrifies Bangladeshis. 13 Oct. 2006. Web. 13 Apr. 2010. <http://www.sptimes.com/2006/10/13/Worldandnation/World_Bank_plan_to_st.shtml>.
Negative Opening Speech
By. Adam TobiasThe affirmative would have you believe that their plan is better, but there are many problems that will come from their plan. Debt, potential warfare, and failure of workers are all problems with the affirmative team’s plan.
Now I would like to introduce our plan.
Step 1: The government prepares for flood relief.
Step 2: The government sets away money so it is not used it away so it is not used.
Step 3: Bangladesh works to convince the peasants that some work needs to be done.
Step 4: Bangladeshi government convinces the people that they need to do the work (“China Relations with...”).
Step 5: The money that was set away is used to build flood controlling structures (Flood Control-Wikipedia.). This is done while using as little machine power as possible.
Step 6: The flood damage is reduced over a period of years and Bangladesh is free to grow (CIA-The World...).
The first point is that of national debt. Many Annex I countries are over $50 billion in debt, and the United States has $12.8 trillion.
As you can see, these countries can clearly not afford to fund such a project, and if they tried to fund it, it would force them into even more debt, which would weaken their economy, so helping Bangladesh would hurt the country itself. Also, many eastern countries surrounding Bangladesh, and including Bangladesh do not always want help from foreigners. There are cases in which the Myanmar government declined help. Also when offered a donation of £60 million, Bangladesh declined this offer (Vidal, John).
Also, outsiders help is not always successful or helpful. In Rwanda in 1994, UN workers stood by while thousands were slaughtered. In Bosnia, the UN tried to give Muslims a safe area, but did nothing to secure or protect them. Another slip-up the United Nations has had is the food smuggled from their World Food Program in Somalia, which was then sold on the black market. In Cote d’Ivoire, charges of sexual exploitation came about, and shockingly, the perpetrators were UN workers.
My third point is potential warfare, as stated before, Myanmar is communist, and its dictator is ranked one of the top five worst dictators in the world. (Powell, Benjamin…). In fact at the United Nations on Tuesday, September 25, 2007, Bush accused Myanmar of imposing “a 19-year reign of fear” that denies basic freedoms of speech, assembly and worship ("Nations React to…). This closeness of these two nations makes it inevitable that at least one foreign relief agent would get into Myanmar. Considering the bad history of UN workers’ assistance to foreign countries, it makes it even more likely that one of them could become drunk and do this kind of act (Lynch, Colum.). This would definitely incite Myanmar’s anger. Since Myanmar is a military regimen it is likely they would use this as an excuse to start a war (CIA-World Factbook…). This would probably be done on Bangladeshis’ own soil, killing the people that we should be saving.
My final point is that the affirmative side is contradicting it’s own interests. They say that they want to build these levees and dams to control the flooding, but this is going to require the use of machinery and other CO2. By emitting more CO2 they are just speeding up the process of global warming, which would cause the oceans to rise, and would further intensify the flooding in Bangladesh. Therefore there plan is contradicting to itself.
It is clear to see from the aforementioned examples that the affirmative side’s argument is not only harmful to Bangladesh, but also harmful to the environment as well. It risks throwing many Annex I countries into even more debt than they already have. It could also lead to doing the exact opposite of saving them, and could end up wiping them out. Our plan might sound too complicated or difficult for the Bangladeshi people to do on their own, but once they accomplish all of the tasks necessary to help cope with the changing climate, and constant flooding, they will develop a great sense of national pride, because they did everything by themselves, from raising the money, to building the flood control structures.
Works Cited
"Austria." Atlapedia Online. Web. 22 Apr. 2010.\ <http://www.atlapedia.com/online/countries/austria.htm>.
Boot, Max. "Paving the Road to Hell: The Failure of U.N. Peacekeeping | Foreign Affairs." Home | Foreign Affairs. Apr. 2000. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/55875/max-boot/paving-the-road-to-hell-the-failure-of-u-n-peacekeeping>.
Canada's National Debt Clock : The Canadian Taxpayers Federation. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.debtclock.ca/>.
"CIA - The World Factbook." Welcome to the CIA Web Site ? Central Intelligence Agency. 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 13 Apr. 2010. <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html>.
"China - Relations with the Third World." Country Data. Ed. Ronald E. Dolan. Federal Research Division Library of Congress, July 1987. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-2901.html>.
Siemaszko, Corky. "Myanmar Government Refuses U.S. Aid." New York News, Traffic, Sports, Weather, Photos, Entertainment, and Gossip - NY Daily News. 8 May 2008. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2008/05/08/2008-05-08_myanmar_government_refuses_us_aid.html>.
Debt Clock Australia. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.debtclock.com.au/index.html>.
"GENOCIDE - RWANDA." Peace Pledge Union. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_rwanda1.html>.
"List of Annex I Parties to the Convention." United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/parties/annex_i/items/2774.php>.
Morrissey, Ed. "» Blog Archive » UN Workers Stealing Food from Starving Children." Hot Air. 15 June 2009. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/15/un-workers-stealing-food-from-starving-children/>.
"Nations React to Myanmar Violence - Asia-Pacific - Msnbc.com." Breaking News, Weather, Business, Health, Entertainment, Sports, Politics, Travel, Science, Technology, Local, US & World News- Msnbc.com. Associated Press, 27 Sept. 2007. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21017676/ns/world_news-asiapacific/>.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html>.
Stecklow, Steve, and Joe Lauria. "U.N. Mum on Probes of Sex-Abuse Allegations - WSJ.com." Business News & Financial News - The Wall Street Journal - WSJ.com. 21 Mar. 2010. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704188104575083334130312808.html>.
UK National Debt Clock — No-Nonsense Guide to Britain's Debt Crisis. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.debtbombshell.com/>.
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.usdebtclock.org/>.
Vidal, John, and David Adam. "Bangladesh Rejects Terms for £60m of Climate Aid from UK | Environment | The Guardian." Latest News, Comment and Reviews from the Guardian | Guardian.co.uk. 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/15/bangladesh-world-bank-climate-finance>.
The Affirmative's Rebuttal Speech
By. Kristi FidlerAs I listened to you give your speech on what your plans are for the country of Bangladesh, I did not notice too much of a difference. You built on to some of our points to make improvements, but the basic ideas of both our plans seem to be extremely similar. So, what exactly are the negative areas of our plan? I do not believe there are any. And your failed attempt to argue that our plan is not the best idea shows how concrete our plan actually is. Our plan involves gaining the help and support of Annex 1 countries to fund and convince the government and locals that action needs to take place, but the actual work will be done by the people of Bangladesh themselves. Our idea of how to fix the flood problems is by creating structures to prevent flooding, but unlike previous plans that have been put into action; we plan on doing environmental research before hand to decide which structures are in Bangladesh’s best interest. The cost of the flood control methods may seem like a high price to pay, but too much money is already spent each year on repairing flood damage. These three points are the main reasons why our plan has no flaws what so ever.
First of all, our plan involves gaining the help and support of Annex 1 countries, but that does not mean that Annex 1 countries will do all of the work. On page three of our plan it says that the natives will be building and doing most of the work for the flood preventions. Since we would allow them to do this themselves, they would begin to feel like they could do something instead of having to wait for Westerners to do things for them ("China-Relations with..."). Also if we let them become too dependent on foreign money and foreign labor, then they might not be able to accomplish other things on their own because they think they cannot ("China-Relations with..."). This is just one reason why our plan is in everyone’s best interest.
Another "flaw" you might have found in our plan is that there have been levees and other structures built before to try and prevent the flooding problems that Bangladesh experiences, but these plans have been unsuccessful. In fact, these structures have actually caused more harm than help to the flooding issues. There is a huge difference between previous plans and our plan and that difference is research. We plan on sending professional environmentalists over to Bangladesh to map out and plan the best and most effective places to build these structures and exactly what structures to build in what specific areas. Our plan involves lots of preparation before we actually take action. Though our plan said a major goal is to get this done quickly, that does not mean without special planning. We will carefully prepare the best and most effective methods on how to prevent flooding according to the experts in that specific field. So as you can see, this is not a "flaw" at all.
Fifty billion dollars may seem a bit pricey but you must keep in mind that this fifty billion dollars is based on the idea that we would just build levees and levees are the most expensive flood control structure. However, levees are not the only flood prevention method we plan on using. Other structures such as floodways, retention ponds, terrace hills and embankments can also be used in areas that the experts believe is most appropriate and these structures are less expensive. Money from the government's FAPs or Flood Action Plans can be given to this cause as not to disrupt the economy and taxes being paid by Bangladeshis (Islam, Nazrul.). This should provide adequate funding as, "It is now several decades that Bangladesh has been regularly spending about 20% of its budget on water development projects" (Islam, Nazrul). I don't believe money or debt in the United States will be an issue because of the money received from different resources such as the Flood Action Plans and the Millennium Challenge Accounts, and also the money that Bangladesh can and will contribute once they understand this plan is in their best interest. I think it is more intelligent to spend the money on preventing the floods than to spend it on repairing the country after it has been damaged, especially because of the number of deaths and homeless people due to the terrible flooding.
Our plan is best way to end the flood and global warming issues in the country of Bangladesh. Even though this plan involves aid from Annex 1 countries, the natives do most of the work. Also, structures built in the past have been unsuccessful, but our plan involves much more research and preparation than any other plans have involved before. The amount of money needed to put this plan into action may seem like a vast amount but when you look at the big picture, you realize that the money already put into fixing the flood damage is much more than the amount spent to prevent the floods from occurring. As you read our carefully devised plan and listen to our main points in this debate, it is clear that Improving Bangladesh: A Multi-Step Plan to Cope With Global Warming is better than any other plan that has been devised before us.
Works Cited
"China - Relations with the Third World." Country Data. Ed. Ronald E. Dolan. Federal Research Division Library of Congress, July 1987. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-2901.html>.
Islam, Nazrul. "Flood Control in Bangladesh." Welcome to the Www.ben-center.org. Bangladesh Environment Network. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.ben-center.org/flood/flood_essay_NazrulIslam.htm>.
Martin, Gary. "Pull Yourself up by Your Bootstraps." The Meanings and Origins of Sayings and Phrases | List of Sayings | English Sayings | Idiom Definitions | Idiom Examples | Idiom Origins | List of Idioms | Idiom Dictionary | Meaning of Idioms. The Phrase Finder, 2010. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/290800.html>.
"Pride | Define Pride at Dictionary.com." Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pride?o=100074>.
Rosenberg, Joel C. Inside the Revolution. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House, 2009. Print.
Stackhouse, John. "Pain and Joy in Bangladesh: A Tale of Two Sisters." International Wildlife July-Aug. 1994. The H.W. Wilson Company/WilsonWeb. Wilson Web, July-Aug. 1994. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://vnweb.hwwilson.com/hww/results/results_single_ftPES.jhtml>.
Negative Rebuttal Speech
By: Seth MusserThe affirmative team may tell you their plan is the best, but if we implement it things could get a lot worse. Their plan will cause Annex I countries to go more in debt than they are, making their currency weaker, and paving the way for lots of problems in their own country (Ferraro, Vincent...). Their plan would use international aid to complete the project. Since Myanmar is right next to Bangladesh this could start a war (Powell, Benjamin.). Our plan also will not hasten climate change through the use of gas powered vehicles (Rohrer, Juerg.).
I will show that we have the better plan, that will actually help more in the long run than the affirmative team’s plan. Their plan will work for a little while, but the repercussions of it could be horrible. Our plan has several advantages over theirs, all of which I would briefly like to point out. Our plan will not put Annex I nations more heavily in debt than they already are (Ferraro, Vincent...). It will not start a potential war (Powell, Benjamin.). Finally, our plan isn’t counterintuitive, as theirs is (Counterintuitive, Definition of...).
It is important to note that the main difference in our plan from theirs is that we have Bangladeshis doing the labor, raising the money, and building their country. They will be able to feel empowered and self-reliant because of this (China-Relations with...). They will be able to gain national pride or the, “Pleasure or satisfaction taken in something done by ... oneself ....” (Pride, Define Pride...). All of our main points show how this will create a better country for them and a better world for everyone else.
Our first point is that of international debt. Annex I nations are nations that are industrialized. (UNFCC.). These nations are heavily in debt (Ferraro, Vincent.), and this project would require roughly $50 billion to complete the way the affirmative team wants to (Strong Levees.). This increasing debt will weaken these nations currency and give their debtors power over them.
This could create a serious problem, as these nations will be more easily pushed into bad economic situations. Since these Annex I nations are some of the “superpowers”, if they fall because of a bad economy, chaos would ensue. There would be a scrambling of other nations for this status (“Superpower...”). These other nations are by and large communist, or corrupt, so this would be another problem presented by the collapse of Annex I countries (“Third World: Definition.”). I am not saying that this specific project will be the “the straw that breaks the camel’s back,” but I am saying it certainly is a very large straw, if not a lead brick.
Our second point is that of potential warfare. Geographically, Bangladesh is right next to Myanmar, a nation which is decidedly communist, decidedly Anti-Western, or Anti-Annex I, and against human rights. In fact Than Shwe, the military dictator of Myanmar is ranked as one of the top five worst dictators in the world (Powell, Benjamin.). Were Annex I nations to enter Bangladesh this kind of dictatorship would most definitely be opposed, especially considering that Myanmar resisted Western aid after the cyclone that hit in 2008 (“Cyclone Relief Efforts...”).
This closeness of these two nations makes it inevitable that at least one foreign relief agent would get into Myanmar. Considering the bad history of UN workers’ assistance to foreign countries, it makes it even more likely that one of them could become drunk and do this kind of act (Lynch, Colum.). This would definitely incite Myanmar’s anger. Since Myanmar is a military regimen it is likely they would use this as an excuse to start a war (CIA-World Factbook.). This would probably be done on Bangladeshis‘ own soil, killing the people that we should be saving.
Our final point against the affirmative is the fact that their plan is counterintuitive (“Counterintuitive-Definition of...”). They say that to adequately protect the people of Bangladesh they need to build expensive structures like levees. These expensive structures would need gas powered vehicles to build, emitting CO2 and hastening global warming (Rohrer, Juerg.). This would simply melt the polar ice caps more, and cause even higher levels of water than now. This is admittedly already happening because of other nation’s pollution, but such a large project would only hasten this (DiMento, Joseph F.).
The affirmative team, as I said earlier is also coming from the viewpoint that the only thing to do is something expensive that uses technology that emits CO2 (Strong Levees). However, this is not true as there are many different ways for the Bangladeshis to do flood control. They would be able to construct floodways, retention ponds, and terrace hills by hand, so as not to defeat their own purpose and kill more Bangladeshis (“Flood Control-Wikipedia...”).
As you can see from our explanation the affirmative side’s plan will be very detrimental. Not only could it destroy finances of Annex I countries, potentially creating chaos, it also might start a war killing the people they should be saving, and finally it will make the problem worse, in the long run, not better. However, our plan allows Bangladeshis to raise the money, do the labor, and do it without creating major climate change. It is obvious logically and emotionally which is the plan to go with to save Bangladeshis, ours.
Works Cited
"CIA - The World Factbook." Welcome to the CIA Web Site ? Central Intelligence Agency. 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 13 Apr. 2010. <__https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html__>.
"China - Relations with the Third World." Country Data. Ed. Ronald E. Dolan. Federal Research Division Library of Congress, July 1987. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-2901.html__>.
"Counterintuitive - Definition of Counterintuitive by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia." Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.thefreedictionary.com/counterintuitive__>.
"Cyclone Relief Efforts Slowed by Myanmar Junta : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. NPR, 10 May 2008. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90343986__>.
DiMento, Joseph F., and Pamela Doughman. Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2007. Print.
Ferraro, Vincent, and Rosser, Melissa. "Global Debt and Third World Development." Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts. 1994. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/globdebt.htm__>.
"Flood Control - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia Foundation, 8 Apr. 2010. Web. 14 Apr. 2010. <__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_control__>.
Islam, Nazrul. "Flood Control in Bangladesh." Welcome to the __//Www.ben-center.org//__. Bangladesh Environment Network. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.ben-center.org/flood/flood_essay_NazrulIslam.htm__>.
Lynch, Colum. "U.N. Says Its Workers Abuse Women in Congo (washingtonpost.com)." Washingtonpost.com - Nation, World, Technology and Washington Area News and Headlines. Washington Post, 27 Nov. 2004. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15363-2004Nov26.html__>.
Nurton, H. "Methods Of Flood Control." Slide Share. Slide Share. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.slideshare.net/HNurton/methods-of-flood-control__>.
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Ryan. "U.S. Money Aids World's Worst Dictators by Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan." Third World Traveler, Third World, United States Foreign Policy, Alternative Media, Travel. Third World Traveler. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/US_Aids_Dictators.html__>.
Rohrer, Juerg. "CO2 - the Major Cause of Global Warming | Time for Change." Time for Change | For Whom Enough Is Too Little - Nothing Is Ever Enough. July 2007. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://timeforchange.org/CO2-cause-of-global-warming__>.
Stamets, Reena S. "World Bank Plan to Stop Floods Horrifies Bangladeshis." Worldandnation: World Bank Plan to Stop Floods Horrifies Bangladeshis. 13 Oct. 2006. Web. 13 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.sptimes.com/2006/10/13/Worldandnation/World_Bank_plan_to_st.shtml__>.
Strong Levees. Strong Levees, 2009. Web. 16 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.stronglevees.com/__>.
"Superpower - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia." Main Page - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia Foundation, 19 Apr. 2010. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower__>.
"Third World: Definition from Answers.com." Answers.com. Answers.com. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://www.answers.com/topic/third-world__>.
UNFCC. "Parties & Observers." United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. UNFCC. Web. 20 Apr. 2010. <__http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/items/2704.php__>.
Affirmative Summary Speech
By. Ashtin NellThe negative side does have good points but nothing that we have not brought into consideration. The negative side has devised a plan but their plan is very similar to our plan. They say our plan is not good enough but they use a lot of points and ideas originated from our plan. So we, as the affirmative side, stand here confused. Are you against or for our plan?
As it has been brought to attention, Bangladesh is dealing with very serious flooding issues. In my opinion and the opinion of my teammate, we feel that our plan is the best and most effective way to help the country of Bangladesh. Improving Bangladesh: A Multi-Step Plan to Cope With Global Warming goes into great detail of our plan but the three main points we wanted to bring to your attention today is, Number One: Our plan wants to get aid from Annex 1 countries. We need help from Annex 1 countries because Bangladesh is not capable of handling its problems on its own. We do not intend on the United States funding everything and the Bangladesh government doing nothing, but we know that they are going to need some help. Number Two: We want to build good, strong, long lasting flood control systems to prevent future flooding in the country of Bangladesh. Number Three: We want this done fast as to not waste the lives of the people of Bangladesh. These are the three main points of our highly detailed carefully devised plan. I strongly and truly believe that our plan is in everyone’s best interest.
Negative Summary Speech
By. Adam TobiasThe affirmative side might tell you that their plan is the best, but when you think it through, both on the logical and emotional side, our plan is much better for the Bangladeshis. We are having them build a sense of national pride, our plan is approximately $49 billion cheaper than their plan, and we are helping them avoid conflicts with other nations.
As stated before, there are many problems that would be encountered if countries were to help Bangladesh with the affirmative plan. They are the extreme debt than many Annex I countries face, the possibility that the outside help will fail the mission, the potential problems that Bangladesh could experience from its neighbors because of the help they received.
As you have heard earlier, there are many reasons why the affirmative plan is not in the Bangladeshis best interests. Our plan will allow the Bangladeshis to do the project all by themselves, in a quick and efficient way. They will be gathering all of the money required for the project, then once they have the regular people convinced that it has to be done, the money that was gathered is now used to build the flood controlling structures. This will lead to a sense of national pride, and now the Bangladeshis will not experience such harsh losses when floods occur.
Affirmative Final Focus
By.Kristi Fidler`
The final focuses that I want you to remember is that the negative side’s plan seems to be extremely similar to ours. We clearly stated and built on to the idea of building flood control structures and doing research before hand to make sure that our plan is successful. The Bangladeshis will do the actual work and we will try to use the most environmentally friendly structures as possible. The cost of these structures can be easily covered by the Bangladeshis themselves and the many accounts set up to fix problems such as this, so the US’s contributions money wise will be minimal to none. I think that the negative sides have some good key points but their minor flaws can be easily fixed to make our plan the best plan that has ever been devised.
Negative Final Focus
By: Seth MusserMy final focus was all impromptu and therefore I do not have typed materials to submit here.